Cl 


The  Church 

and 

International  Peace 


A  Series  of  Papers  by  the  Trustees  of 
THE  CHURCH  PEACE  UNION 

IX 

America  and  the  Asiatic 

World 

by 

Professor  Shailer  Mathews 


THE  CHURCH  PEACE  UNION 
70  Fifth  Avenue 

NEW  YORK 


The  Church  and  International  Peace 

A  uniform  series  of  papers  by  the  Trustees  of  The 
Church  Peace  Union,  treating  the  problems  of  war  and 
peace  from  the  point  of  view  of  religion,  and  especially 
emphasizing  the  message  the  Church  should  have  for  the 
world  in  this  time  of  war. 


ALREADY  PUBLISHED 

1.  The  Cause  of  the  War,  by  Rev.  Charles  E.  Jefferson,  D.D. 

2.  The  Midnight  Cry,  by  Rt.  Rev.  David  H.  Greer,  D.D. 

3.  The  Scourge  of  Militarism,  by  Rev.  Peter  Ainslie,  D.D. 

4.  Europe’s  War,  America’s  Warning,  by  Rev.  Charles  S.  Mac- 

farland,  Ph.D. 

5.  The  Way  to  Disarm,  by  Hamilton  Holt,  LL.D. 

6.  The  Church’s  Mission  as  to  War  and  Peace,  by  Jimius  B. 

Remensnyder,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

7.  Might  or  Meekness,  by  Rev.  William  Pierson  Merrill,  D.D. 

8.  The  Church  and  the  Ideal,  by  Rt.  Rev.  William  Lawrence,  D.D. 

9.  America  and  the  Asiatic  World,  by  Professor  Shailer  Mathews 


IN  PREPARATION 

1.  America,  Christianity  and  Peace,  by  James  Cardinal  Gibbons 

2.  After  the  War — What?  By  Rev.  Francis  E.  Clark,  D.D. 

3.  The  United  Church  and  the  Terms  of  Peace,  by  Rev.  Frederick 

Lynch,  D.D. 

4.  Adequate  Armaments,  by  Prof.  William  I.  Hull. 


America  and  the  Asiatic  World 

Address  by  Professor  Shailer  Mathews,  President  of  the  Federal 
Council  of  Churches  of  Christ  in  America,  at  the  Dinner  of  the 
Japan  Society,  the  New  York  Peace  Society,  the 
Church  Peace  Union,  and  the  Federal  Council  of 
Churches  of  Christ  in  America,  at  the  Hotel 
Astor,  Monday  Evening,  April  19,  1915 

On  my  arrival  in  Japan  I  found  myself  suddenly  trans¬ 
ferred  into  a  situation  where  I  was  forced  to  see  life  in  terms 
not  of  individuals,  or  even  of  cities,  but  in  terms  of  nations 
and  of  epochs.  A  man  cannot  go  through  that  sort  of  experi¬ 
ence,  even  though  it  last  for  only  a  month,  without  seriously 
inquiring  as  to  the  forces  upon  which  history  must  ultimately 
be  based.  Our  mission  to  Japan  brought  home  to  me  not 
only  the  seriousness  of  the  particular  task  to  which  I  was 
assigned,  but  also  the  question  as  to  the  practicability  of  the 
message  which  I  was  to  deliver.  To  bear  a  message  of  good¬ 
will  from  Christians  of  one  nation  to  another  nation  through 
its  Christians  is  either  a  work  of  supererogation  or  a  proclama¬ 
tion  of  a  new  basis  of  international  policy.  The  query  as  to 
the  ability  of  religion  to  accomplish  that  which  we  have  told 
people  it  can  accomplish  is  one  of  those  explorative  questions 
which  test  not  only  one’s  faith  but  also  one’s  ability  to  see 
facts  in  their  true  perspective.  It  is  hard  enough  to  see  the 
meaning  of  life  even  in  the  circles  touched  in  our  daily  routine, 
but  when  we  find  ourselves  asked  to  measure  the  meaning 
of  life  in  the  reciprocal  relations  of  groups  of  hundreds  of 
millions  of  peoples,  we  cannot  avoid  feeling  that  we  are  in 
the  midst  of  a  universe  from  which  it  is  impossible  to  escape. 
In  our  local  religious  and  political  relations  we  can  easily 
pass  from  one  town  or  state  to  another  town  or  state ;  we  can 
hope  to  correct  our  misfortunes,  our  mistakes,  and  even  our 
failures,  but  when  we  find  ourselves  in  the  grip  of  civiliza¬ 
tions  and  empires  and  are  forced  to  pronounce  upon  the 
wisdom  of  policies,  the  effects  of  which  for  good  or  ill  are 
unescapable,  a  level-eyed  honesty  and  a  well  balanced  religious 


3 


faith  become  imperative.  Face  to  face  with  conditions  which, 
whether  changing  or  permanent,  are  to  help  determine  the 
course  of  the  world’s  history,  I  was  forced  to  test  my  faith 
in  the  Gospel  by  its  applicability  to  history  in  the  large;  and 
the  question  which  the  conditions  I  shall  presently  attempt 
to  describe  continually  forced  upon  me  is  the  question  which 
nation  after  nation  itself  must  confront :  Is  our  professed 
belief  in  the  finality  of  the  ideals  of  the  Christian  religion 
justifiable,  or  must  we  abandon  reliance  upon  spiritual  forces 
for  reliance  upon  physical  force? 

As  a  representative  of  the  Federal  Council  of  the  Churches 
of  Christ  in  America,  it  was  to  this  moral  and  religious  issue 
I  was  called  to  direct  myself.  In  the  nature  of  the  case 
neither  the  Christian  embassy  nor  the  Federal  Council  could 
enter  politics,  either  national  or  international ;  neither  could  be 
pro-Japanese  or  anti-Japanese;  pro-China  or  anti-China.  Our 
duty  while  in  Japan  was  to  learn  all  we  could  of  the  Japanese 
attitude  and  situation  and  do  what  we  could  to  help  the 
Japanese  to  understand  America’s  friendship  and  the  intricacy 
of  the  world-situation  of  which  the  American- Japanese  ques¬ 
tion  is  one  aspect. 

Now  that  we  are  in  America  I  understand  the  situation 
to  be  unchanged  in  these  regards.  The  Federal  Council  is 
neither  pro-Japanese,  pro-Chinese  nor  pro-Asiatic.  As  the 
representative  of  the  churches  its  effort  is  to  help  apply 
intelligently  the  principles  of  the  Gospel  to  international 
policies. 

For  myself  I  resolutely  refuse  to  be  regarded  as  the 
advocate  of  any  foreign  nation.  But  as  a  Christian  I  count 
nothing  alien  to  Christian  idealism,  and  as  a  representative  of 
the  Christian  churches  of  America  I  count  no  duty  higher 
or  more  immediately  pressing  than  that  of  evangelizing 
foreign  policies. 

We  are  amazed  at  the  failure  of  the  ideal  elements  of 
civilization  to  prevent  nations  lapsing  into  barbarism  rein¬ 
forced  by  scientific  discoveries.  But  appalling  as  is  the 
cataclysm  in  Europe,  its  elements  are  simpler  than  those  of 


4 


the  situation  which  the  world  faces  in  Asia.  There,  two  halves 
of  a  world,  each  with  its  millenia  of  development,  for  the 
first  time  actually  face  each  other.  The  impact  of  the  Western 
civilization  upon  the  Asiatic  world  has  brought  conflict  of 
ideas  in  religion  and  in  economics  such  as  the  world  has 
never  seen.  The  effect  of  this  impact  is  dependent  upon  so 
complicated  a  mass  of  causes  as  to  bewilder  the  most  sanguine 
social  prophet.  The  question  as  to  the  final  court  of  appeal 
in  social  evolution  is  almost  shouted  at  any  man  who,  detach¬ 
ing  himself  from  the  attitude  of  the  tourist  or  of  the  provincial 
critic  of  foreign  affairs,  undertakes  to  estimate  the  tendencies 
of  the  actual  situation  which  is  developing  in  Asia  and 
particularly  in  Japan,  the  first  country  which  has  seriously 
undertaken  to  combine  Asiatic  and  Western  civilization. 

I  doubt  if  any  man  is  really  capable  of  accurately  presenting 
the  questions  which  arise  from  this  impact  of  civilizations 
and  histories,  and  I  can  claim  for  myself  only  the  worth  of 
any  honest  effort  to  see  things  as  they  really  are,  to  judge 
them  in  the  light  of  such  historical  and  sociological  experience 
as  I  may  have,  and  to  detach  myself  from  everything  that  is 
novel  and  picturesque  in  the  interest  of  an  understanding  of 
things  in  the  large.  There  is,  I  am  convinced,  need  of  great 
caution  in  proposing  social  panaceas,  even  forms  of  religion, 
for  the  situation  which  is  so  rapidly  developing  in  Japan  and 
which  will  come  so  inevitably  in  China.  Our  first  duty  is 
that  of  investigation  rather  than  of  dogmatic  prescription  or 
criticism.  But  the  findings  of  such  investigation  must  be 
susceptible  of  statement  in  terms  of  tendency  toward 
reasonable  idealism  or  toward  war.  And  that  alternative  is 
our  primary  interest  as  religious  and  moral  persons. 

I. 

The  first  element  of  the  present  world-sit  uaiion  as 
embodied  in  Japan  is  the  grooving  solidarity  of  world- 
civilization. 

The  rapid  development  of  japan  is  amazing  even  in  the 


5 


eyes  of  one  who  has  shared  in  the  growth  of  the  United 
States;  but  this  rapidity,  sensational  as  it  is  in  itself,  is  of 
secondary  significance.  It  is  growth  by  appropriation  not 
by  evolution.  It  is  therefore  only  an  introductory  stage  to  that 
of  assimilation  and  consequent  transformation.  Western 
civilization  was  not  produced  but  taken  over  by  Japan,  as  it 
were,  ready-made.  Financial  institutions,  industrial  organiza¬ 
tions,  constitutional  precedents,  which  Europe  and  America 
have  evolved  at  the  cost  of  innumerable  blunders  and  infinite 
suffering,  have  been  appropriated  by  Japan  practically  with¬ 
out  a  struggle.  When  one  compares,  for  instance,  the  Satsuma 
revolution  with  the  generations  of  struggles  which  in  England 
made  constitutional  monarchy  an  actual  reality,  it  will  be 
evident  that  modern  Japan  knows  nothing  of  the  real  agony 
of  producing  political  conceptions.  In  point  of  fact  Japan 
has  contributed  as  yet  no  significant  conception  to  modern 
theories  of  the  state.  Similarly  in  the  case  of  Japanese 
industrial  and  financial  institutions— they,  like  the  Japanese 
military  system,  are  the  products  of  centuries  of  development 
in  which  Japan  had  no  part,  but  the  results  of  which  she  has 
readily  appropriated.  But  Japan  is  more  than  superficially 
Western.  It  is  difficult  to  see  that  these  elements  of  social 
life  differ  in  any  significant  particular  from  those  in  Europe 
and  America.  The  railroads,  factories,  educational  systems, 
military  establishments,  banks,  insurance  companies,  even 
baseball,  are  importations  in  process  of  assimilation. 

True,  this  occidentalizing  has  not  yet  appreciably  affected 
the  life  of  millions  of  Japanese  who  live  outside  the  cities, 
and  time  alone  can  show  how  powerful  is  the  inertia  of  the 
institutions  which  constitute  Japan’s  social  inheritance  from 
her  past.  But  one  thing  seems  to  me  to  be  beyond  question : 
So  far  as  dominating  reconstructive  forces  are  concerned, 
Japan  is  no  more  Oriental  than  is  Germany  or  the  United 
States.  It  will  only  be  a  few  years  before  every  man  and 
'  Oman  of  Japan  will  be  educated  to  all  intents  and  purposes 
like  Europeans,  will  trade  and  manufacture  and  found  banks 


6 


like  Americans.  Their  mental  processes  will  no  longer  be 
Oriental,  in  the  sense  usually  given  that  term,  but  they  will 
be  Western — members  of  the  community  of  the  modern  social 
order,  facing  with  us  the  problems  of  economic,  political  and 
spiritual  life.  When  this  result  of  present  tendencies  has 
been  reached,  it  will  be  outstandingly  true  that  the  new 
Asiatic  civilization  will  not  be  the  result  of  mere  imitation, 
but  an  organic  transformation  in  which  the  permanent  values 
of  Asiatic  as  well  as  of  Western  civilization  are  preserved. 
Japan  has  already  thus  assimilated  Chinese  and  Korean 
elements ;  it  will  not  fail  to  show  itself  equally  successful  in 
this  further  process.  As  the  United  States  is  combining 
individuals  of  many  peoples  into  a  national  unity,  so  is  Japan 
'combining  civilizations  into  a  social  order  which,  though 
certain  to  be  its  own  contribution  to  history,  will  be  none  the 
less  generically  modern. 

Japan  is  still  the  land  of  cherry  blossoms  and  wisteria, 
of  beautiful  mountains,  of  exquisite  courtesy,  of  delicate  art, 
of  fascinating  folk  ways,  and  of  endless  charm;  but  Japan  is 
also  a  land  of  factories,  dock  yards,  coal  mines,  banks,  depart¬ 
ment  stores,  schools,  hard-headed  business  and  trained 
diplomacy.  The  sooner  the  Western  nations  appreciate  the 
essential  identity  of  dominant  influences  of  Japanese  life  with 
their  own  the  sooner  will  they  understand  and  properly 
estimate  Japanese  policies.  So  long  as  the  Japanese  are 
regarded  as  merely  imitative  Orientals  they  will  be  misunder¬ 
stood,  and  the  misunderstanding  will  be  the  soil  for  too  many 
seeds  of  ill-will  and  suspicion.  Furthermore,  the  sooner  the 
other  partners  in  this  Western  civilization  come  to  distrust  the 
elaborate  theories  of  ethnic  dififerences  and  racial  antipathies, 
born  of  too  highly  refined  academic  speculation,  the  sooner  will 
they  recognize  this  essential  unity  of  spirit  as  a  chief  factor 
in  Japanese  dealings  with  other  nations.  Japan  is  taking  her 
place  among  the  powers,  not  because  she  is  ‘‘Oriental,”  but 
because  she  is  ceasing  to  be  Oriental.  There  could  be  nothing 
more  futile  and  misleading  than  to  approach  actual  concrete 


7 


problems  of  international  relations  with  a  preconceived  theory 
of  national  characteristics  born  of  a  jumble  of  provincial 
prejudice,  a  priori  race-psychology,  smoking-room  gossip 
and  the  books  of  Lafcadio  Hearn. 

II 

A  second  element  in  the  new  Asiatic  situation  is  the  curse 
of  international  suspicion. 

True,  one  ought  not  to  be  surprised  at  this  unfortunate  ele¬ 
ment  in  internationalism.  The  history  of  the  development  of 
nations  has  been  very  largely  one  of  wars  in  which  patriotism 
has  been  a  euphemism  for  a  socialized  hatred  of  other  nations 
whose  customs  and  character  have  been  misrepresented  and 
misunderstood.  To-day,  as  never  before,  we  are  experiencing 
the  evils  of  an  exaggerated  repellant  patriotism  that  believes 
slander  of  one’s  enemies  to  be  love  of  one’s  nation.  Any  stu¬ 
dent  of  European  history  knows  the  suspicion  with  which  the 
Anglo-Saxon  race  have  in  the  past  regarded  the  Romance 
peoples,  but  if  he  were  to  be  set  down  in  the  changing  world 
of  the  East,  he  would  find  himself  suddenly  in  the  midst  of 
a  suspicion  which,  if  natural  in  the  impact  of  antipodal  civiliza¬ 
tions,  is  none  the  less  disconcerting.  Looking  thus  at  my  own 
country  through  the  eyes  of  Asiatic  suspicion,  I  saw  a  very 
different  land  from  that  with  which  I  believed  myself 
acquainted.  I  saw  a  nation  materialistic,  dollar-mad,  and 
hypocritical ;  a  nation  that  carried  the  Golden  Rule  and  the 
Christ  to  individual  heathen,  and  at  home  permitted  slums  to 
develop,  crimes  to  go  unpunished,  and  graft  to  become  the 
base  of  municipal  government.  I  saw  a  nation  professing 
to  be  altruistic,  yet  permitting  subjects  of  a  friendly  nation 
to  be  insulted  and  abused  in  one  of  its  states.  I  saw  a  nation 
with  imperialistic  ambitions  moving  slowly,  yet  surely, 
towards  Asiatic  territory.  I  saw  it  take  the  Hawaiian  Islands, 
seize  Panama  by  means  of  revolution,  force  its  way  upon  the 
Philippine  Islands,  and  seek  concessions  in  China.  I  saw 
it  building  war  ships,  fortifying  Hawaii  and  Philippines, 


8 


and  if  current  stories  were  to  be  believed,  seeking  a  naval  base 
opposite  Formosa  and  only  biding  its  time  before  making 
war  upon  Japan. 

Every  American  would  say  such  an  opinion  is  unjust.  Un¬ 
just  it  certainly  is;  but  is  it  so  very  unlike  what  some  of  us 
see  when  we  look  westward  across  the  Pacific  towards  Japan? 
If  we  are  to  judge  Japan  by  the  reports  in  the  newspapers, 
conversation  at  the  Clubs,  and  even  learned  papers  by  pro¬ 
fessors  who  would  reduce  history  to  epigrams,  we  see  a  na¬ 
tion  that  is  merely  biding  its  time,  arrogant,  insincere,  land- 
hungry,  within  twenty  years  seizing  Formosa,  Seghalin, 
Korea,  Southern  Manchuria,  now  determined  upon  seizing 
China,  and  incidentally  establishing  a  naval  base  in  Mexico, 
and  getting  ready  to  plant  its  flag  upon  the  Rocky  Mountains. 

Each  of  these  interpretations  is  the  codification  of  sus¬ 
picions  born  of  mutual  ignorance  and  misunderstanding.  In 
fact,  every  suspicion  America  has  had  of  Japan,  Japan  has 
had  of  America.  In  such  suspicions  the  details  are  not  the 
serious  matter.  Each  bit  of  sinister  gossip  may  be  denied 
promptly.  We  may  run  down  absurd  stories  about  Japanese 
spies  and  American  warships,  but  the  attitude  of  suspicion 
will  not  be  cured  by  official  denials.  Armies  and  navies  will 
not  allay  suspicion.  You  cannot  remove  it  by  killing  those 
who  possess  it ;  it  cannot  be  stilled  by  sinking  ships,  blowing 
up  forts  or  telling  stories  of  atrocities.  The  only  cure  of 
international  suspicion  is  international  goodwill,  a  mutual 
respect  between  nations  for  each  other’s  rights.. 

Are  the  moral  forces  of  America  and  Japan — ^to  say 
nothing  of  other  nations  of  the  world — strong  enough  to  meet 
this  test?  In  an  age  which  is  deliberately  corrupting  inter¬ 
national  friendships,  that  is  being  taught  that  a  treaty  has 
no  value  beyond  fear  which  the  treaty-making  nation  may 
inspire,  that  sees  billings  gate  replacing  discussion  of  peace 
policies,  we  who  profess  our  faith  in  the  power  of  morality 
to  destroy  these  suspicions  face  no  small  adventure.  But 
allay  suspicions  we  must  if  this  new  mingling  of  tie  Western 


9 


and  Eastern  worlds  is  ever  to  be  other  than  a  source  of  in¬ 
ternational  struggle.  Just  at  present  I  believe  the  friendship 
of  Japan  and  the  United  States  is  threatened,  not  so  much 
because  of  any  particular  unfriendly  act,  but  because  of  this 
accumulating  mass  of  mutual  suspicion,  bom  of  irrational 
misunderstanding,  incipient  commercial  rivalry,  professional 
mischief  makers  and  over-heated  rhetoric. 

But  there  is  much  more  at  stake  than  friendship  between 
the  United  States  and  Japan.  An  epoch  of  history  is  at 
stake;  the  policies  which  will  affect  our  descendants  to  the 
third  and  fourth  generation,  are  at  stake.  Important  as  the 
relations  between  the  two  nations  may  be,  how  vastly  more 
important  is  it  for  China  and  all  Asia  that  the  two  civiliza¬ 
tions  shall  be  permitted  to  mingle  and  mutually  react  upon 
each  other,  unpoisoned  by  suspicions  begotten  in  or  forced 
upon  the  country  in  which  this  combination  is  most  under 
way.  While  a  new  civilization  is  being  born  in  Japan  of  the 
nion  of  the  West  and  the  East  it  is  only  the  part  of  wisdom 
.o  see  that  suspicion  is  not  among  its  pre-natal  influence. 

III. 

The  task  of  guaranteeing  a  healthy,  peaceable  mingling 
of  the  two  world  forces  in  Japan  must  rest  idtimately  upon 
the  moral  and  religious  forces  at  work  within  all  the  coun¬ 
tries  involved  in  Asiatic  development. 

This  simple  statement  of  fact  brings  one  face  to  face 
with  the  entire  problem  of  Christian  missions.  Here  again 
our  judgment  is  apt  to  be  swayed  by  personal  estimation  of 
facts.  On  the  one  side  are  educated  Japanese  sturdily  main¬ 
taining  that  the  older  religions  of  Japan  furnish  the  neces¬ 
sary  moral  forces  to  determine  the  process  of  the  social 
transformation.  On  the  other  side  we  meet  statements  as¬ 
serting  the  exclusive  ability  of  the  Christian  church  to  ac¬ 
complish  the  same  end.  A  detached  and  general  estimate 
of  the  situation  will  probably  give  more  accurate  impressions 
than  is  possible  for  the  representative  of  either  of  the  op- 


10 


posing  religious  forces  of  Japan.  In  too  many  cases  the 
workers  in  both  Christian  and  non-Christian  groups  fail  to 
see  social  forces  in  the  large  and  mistake  a  knowledge  of 
routine  duties  and  local  situations  for  general  tendencies. 
After,  however,  hearing  and  reading  a  variety  of  opinions, 
I  have  come  to  at  least  three  definite  conclusions,  regarding 
the  progress  of  basal  moral  forces  in  Japan. 

1.  In  the  first  place,  this  community  of  civilization  of 
which  I  have  been  speaking  is  producing  two  sets  of  religious 
problems  in  Japan.  On  the  one  side  are  those  which  are  set 
by  Western  civilization.  It  is  a  very  general  opinion  among 
the  intelligent  Japanese  that  Western  culture  has  failed  to 
furnish  moral  direction  to  those  who  have  come  under  its 
influence.  It  has  had  the  negative  effect  of  breaking  down 
the  old  religious  control  and  of  alienating  practically  an  entire 
generation  of  young  men  from  the  religious  views  of  their 
ancestors.  Twenty  years  ago  it  was  the  belief  of  men  like 
Baron  Shibusawa  that  the  old  Japanese  ideals  of  loyalty 
and  filial  piety  would  protect  the  youth  of  Japan  from  the 
moral  anarchy  liable  to  result  from  the  introduction  of  West¬ 
ern  learning.  I  believe  that  very  few  thoughtful  Japanese 
at  the  present  time  have  any  such  belief.  The  problem  of 
meeting  the  flow  of  materialistic  thought  that  has  swept  over 
Japan  is  altogether  too  great  for  anything  short  of  a  religion 
to  accomplish,  and  thus  far  the  educated  class  of  Japan  have 
not  really  co-ordinated  religion,  as  distinct  from  ethics,  with 
their  culture.  At  the  same  time  they  have  been  given  sinister 
lessons  by  the  “Christian  nations”  as  to  the  supremacy  of 
economic  interests.  The  lesson  is  unfortunate.  No  observer 
of  Japanese  policy  can  fail  to  see  what  spiritual  dangers  lurk 
in  a  possible  utilizing  of  the  Japanese  patriotism-religion,  by 
a  policy  of  commercial  expansion.  Just  as  such  expansion 
has  sometimes  been  identified  by  America  and  Great  Britain 
with  conscience  and  by  Germany  with  Germanic  Kultur,  so 
in  Japan  is  it  in  danger  of  being  confused  with  that  marvel¬ 
lous  loyalty  which  is  a  basis  of  Japan’s  national  vigor.  With 


11 


education  and  patriotism  thus  assailed  by  anti-spiritual  forces 
the  westernized  Japanese  present  a  problem  to  Christianity 
essentially  the  same  as  in  corresponding  circles  in  Europe  and 
the  United  States.  Such  modern  men  of  Japan  would  be  no 
more  affected  by  the  ill-trained,  though  zealous,  missionary 
than  are  the  well  educated  classes  of  America  affected  by  the 
workers  in  rescue  missions. 

In  the  case,  however,  of  those  teeming  millions  who  are 
not  yet  transformed  thoroughly  by  Western  learning,  but 
still  worship  at  the  shrines  and  temples,  the  problem  is  differ¬ 
ent.  Their  faith  is  not  troubled  by  Nietsche,  Haeckel  or  even 
Herbert  Spencer.  To  them  religion  can  be  brought  less  as  a 
philosophy  and  more  on  its  own  merits.  Among  these  people 
the  ordinary  missionary  can  work  more  effectively  than  in 
cities.  At  least  it  is  a  general  opinion  among  educated  Jap¬ 
anese  that  the  Christian  missionary’s  chief  business,  outside 
of  his  institutions  of  education,  will  be  as  evangelist  in  small 
towns.  If  I  catch  the  implication  of  this  opinion,  it  is  that 
while  there  is  still  room  for  the  exceptional  missionary  as 
a  representative  of  progressive  Christian  thought  and  activi¬ 
ties,  and  for  the  ordinary  missionary  as  evangelist  among  the 
genuinely  non-Christian,  non-Western  population,  the  Jap¬ 
anese  of  education  can  be  trusted  to  carry  out  increasingly 
the  propaganda  of  their  faith,  both  in  school  and  church, 
thereby  evolving  a  type  of  Christianity  which  is  particularly 
adapted  to  the  new  conditions  being  born  of  Western  culture 
and  Japanese  life.  That  is  to  say,  that  the  spiritual  forces 
of  New  Japan  will  be  able  to  cope  with  the  conditions  which 
threaten  moral  anarchy. 

2.  But  it  is  well  to  look  a  little  deeper  into  the  significance 
of  the  Christian  movement  as  we  see  it  in  Japan.  There,  for 
the  first  time,  it  faces  a  non-Christian  population  possessed 
of  essentially  the  same  social  mind  and  education  as  that  of 
the  land  from  which  the  missionary  comes.  That  this  new 
social  mind  is  due  in  larger  measure  to  the  missionaries  of  a 
generation  or  more  ago,  all  thoughtful  Japanese  readily  admit. 


12 


From  the  point  of  view  of  sociology,  foreign  missions  can  be 
described  as  the  process  by  which  Western  civilization  at 
first  instinctively  but  gradually  more  deliberately,  along  with 
its  militarism,  its  industrial  organizations  and  its  education, 
carried  also  that  which  had  been  its  driving  and  unifying 
moral  force  — ■  namely  its  religious  ideals.  But  its  partial 
success  is  one  of  its  dangers.  It  is  exceedingly  difficult 
for  a  missionary  not  to  regard  himself  unconsciously  as  a 
member  of  a  superior  race.  Such  an  attitude  inevitably  min¬ 
isters  to  misunderstanding,  and  ill  will.  In  the  same  propor¬ 
tion  as  Japanese  move  forward  will  they  resent  this  attitude 
and  the  more  will  they  insist  that  the  Japanese  social  order 
be  permitted  to  choose  its  own  influences.  Then  will  come 
the  real  test  of  the  missionary  effort.  It  is  perfectly  obvious 
that  if  our  religion  cannot  thoroughly  Christianize  the  social 
order  in  America,  it  will  even  more  pronouncedly  fail  in 
Christianizing  the  same  socinl  order  when  it  is  handicapped 
by  national  suspicion  and  the  presence  of  rival  religions. 
Personally,  I  believe  that  the  mission  movement  will  adjust 
itself — in  fact,  it  is  already  adjusting  itself  to  this  new  con¬ 
dition.  Our  growing  appreciation  of  the  intellectual  tenabilit}' 
and  social  power  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus  is  training  Chris¬ 
tians  to  larger  efficiency  in  non-Christian  lands.  But  in 
Japan  the  task  is  more  like  that  of  home  missions  than  of  the 
foreign  missions  in  the  East. 

3.  In  the  third  place,  Christianity  has  had  a  noteworthy 
influence  in  Japan  outside  of  churches — an  influence  which 
cannot  be  rneasnred  in  statistics  or  by  professions  of  loyalty 
to  itself.  There  is  at  the  present  time  in  Japan  a  widespread 
and  deepening  interest  in  morality  and  religion.  Like  America, 
Japan  is  passing  through  a  sort  of  conviction  of  sin,  and  the 
thoughtful  and  intelligent  men  throughout  the  country  are 
now  thinking  of  the  problems  of  life  in  terms  of  ideals,  sub¬ 
stantially  Christian.  Thus,  there  is  a  new  concern  in  regard 
to  prostitution,  business  honesty,  and  political  corruption.  This 
interest  is  by  no  means  limited  to  the  Japanese  Christians  who 


13 


are  showing  zeal  and  power  in  the  maintenance  of  a  three 
years’  evangelical  campaign.  It  is  found  among  the  Bud¬ 
dhists  who  are  undertaking  to  duplicate  the  Y.  M.  C.  A.  and 
other  Christian  institutions.  It  was  found  among  those  who 
are  the  followers  of  Confucius.  But  wherever  the  ideals  are 
the  same  as  those  of  the  more  intelligent  type  of  Christian 
ethics  it  is  impossible  to  doubt  that  this  deepening  interest  in 
things  spiritual  is  in  large  measure  due  to  Christian  influence 
— in  schools,  in  literature,  and  from  the  pulpit.  In  fact,  Chris¬ 
tianity  seems  to  have  had  the  power  to  awaken  non-Christian 
religions  in  Japan  at  the  point  at  which  their  tenets  most 
resemble  Christianity.  So  that  to  a  degree  that  is  very  im¬ 
pressive,  there  is  developing  in  Japan  a  moral  attitude  which 
is  essentially  the  same  as  that  which  Christianity  inculcates. 
Even  though  it  be  true  that  this  ethical  revival  has  not 
developed  a  searching  conception  of  sin  and  is  still  seeking 
a  religious  faith  able  to  develop  moral  sacrifice  and  enthusiasm, 
it  is  of  profound  significance  to  the  course  of  history  in  Asia. 
Formulas  and  words  are  here  of  secondary  importance  to 
attitudes  and  ideals.  Whether  Japan  ever  becomes  professedly 
a  Christian  country  is  of  less  moment  than  whether  its  develop¬ 
ment  is  to  be  controlled  by  the  principles  Christianity  pro¬ 
fesses.  And  in  this  regard  the  opinion  of  such  men  as  Dr. 
Soyeda  is  explicitly  affirmative. 

But  in  the  same  proportion  as  this  moral  attitude,  under 
whatever  name,  is  socialized  in  the  upper  classes  of  Japan, 
does  its  promise  become  more  hopeful.  The  heart  of  Chris¬ 
tian  ethics  is  to  give  justice  rather  than  to  get  righhs;  but  such 
ethical  idealism  leads  ultimately  to  religious  conviction  that 
God  is  love,  and  that  in  the  giving  of  justice  one  is  only  re¬ 
producing  the  sacrificial  attitude  of  God  himself.  If  the 
representatives  of  Christianity  in  Japan  insist  upon  the  sacri¬ 
ficial  element  of  Christianity  they  are  bound  to  influence  the 
entire  field  of  social  readjustment.  If  Christianity  be  a  power 
of  God  unto  Salvation,  not  only  in  the  case  of  individuals 
but  of  the  constructive  forces  of  civilization,  how  can  it  really 


14 


operate  in  Japan  as  a  mere  form  of  self-realizing  individual¬ 
ism?  How  can  Christianity  be  preached  in  the  larger  sense 
of  the  word  without  preaching  human  equality  and  fraternity? 
How  can  a  Christian  who  has  really  the  spirit  of  Jesus  Christ 
be  indifferent  to  the  rights  as  well  as  to  the  physical  needs 
of  the  less  favored  classes?  Can  man  be  Christian  and  not 
be  concerned  to  bring  brotherliness  into  international  politics? 
These  are  questions  which  confront  America  and  Japan  alike. 
In  Japan,  as  in  America,  Christian  idealism  must  ultimately 
express  itself  in  legislation  dealing  with  the  dangerous  influ¬ 
ences  which  are  the  outgrowth  of  industrial  civilization.  There 
can  be  seen  in  the  recent  election  in  Japan  the  growing  in¬ 
fluence  of  the  conception  of  constitutionalism  as  opposed  to 
clan  influence,  in  government.  Here  again  the  moral  problems 
of  political  Japan  are  essentially  the  same  as  those  of  America 
and  to  a  considerable  extent  will  be  answered  as  they  are  be¬ 
ing  answered  in  America.  The  community  of  life  which  has 
given  rise  to  social  change  will  ultimately  demand  identity  of 
treatment  in  terms  of  moral  idealism,  and  religious  dynamic. 
It  is  useless  for  us  to  preach  any  religion  in  Japan  that  does 
not  face  these  social  questions.  It  is  quite  as  useless  as  it 
would  be  in  America.  To  these  spiritual  forces  both  Japan 
and  America  must  look,  if  the  course  of  social  development 
is  to  be  healthy  and  helpful,  and  I  am  thankful  to  say  that 
l  oth  in  Japan  and  the  United  States  new  moral  forces  are 
already  operative.  How  far  they  must  affect  internation¬ 
alism  will  appear  as  we  face  the  vital  question  of  the  particular 
relations  of  Japan  and  the  United  States.  For  the  future 
of  Asia  is  a  concrete  problem  in  the  morality  of  international 
oolicies. 

IV. 

The  relations  of  America  and  Japan  with  each  other  and 
with  China  present  a  supreme  opportunity  for  establishing 
international  politics  upon  new  ethical  basis. 

To  understand  the  relations  of  Japan  and  the  United 
States,  it  is  necessary  to  remember  that  they  are  a  phase  of  the 


15 


larger  relationship  which  has  developed  because  of  the  impact 
of  Western  and  Asiatic  worlds.  So  long  as  we  consider  the 
matter  as  exclusively  the  concern  of  two  countries  are  we 
bound  to  see  the  policies  of  each  in  the  wrong  perspective, 
and  to  deliver  ourselves  to  partisan  sympathies  and  mutual 
recriminations. 

The  American- Japanese  situation  involves  two  distinct 
considerations ;  first,  the  direct  relations  of  the  United  States 
with  Japan  regarding  the  treatment  of  Japanese  subjects  in 
America ;  and,  secondly,  the  complications  which  are  arising 
and  which  are  likely  to  rise  in  the  future  over  China. 

1.  As  regards  the  issue  which  has  arisen  between  the 
United  States  and  Japan  relative  to  the  treatment  of  the  Jap¬ 
anese  in  California  and  other  Western  States,  the  superficial 
issue  is  the  immediate  problem,  and  is  easily  understood.  By 
the  treaty  drawn  between  Japan  and  the  United  States  the  sub¬ 
jects  of  both  governments  were  accorded  the  same  rights  of 
commerce  in  the  respective  countries.  These  rights  did  not 
include  ownership  of  land  by  Japanese  in  America  or  by 
Americans  in  Japan.  So  far  as  the  Americans  in  Japan  are 
concerned,  their  status  is  that  of  all  other  aliens.  Until  the 
new  law  now  on  the  Statute  Books  is  put  into  operation,  they 
cannot  hold  land  in  fee  simple.  They  may,  however,  lease 
land  for  999  years,  or  may  organize  corporations  for  the  pur¬ 
pose  of  holding  land.  In  the  former  case,  it  should  be  added 
that  the  leases  often  provide  that  if  the  law  is  passed  grant¬ 
ing  ownership  in  fee  simple,  the  lessee  may  exchange  his  lease 
for  such  direct  ownership. 

The  situation,  however,  is  different  as  regards  the  case 
of  the  Japanese  in  America.  Except  in  States  with  general 
laws  preventing  or  regulating  ownership  by  all  aliens,  the 
Japanese  have  enjoyed  essentially  the  same  privileges  as  the 
subjects  of  other  nations,  or  of  American  citizens.  That  is 
to  say,  until  the  recent  legislation  in  California,  the  Japanese 
were  permitted  privileges  regarding  land  ownership  in  excess 
of  the  rights  granted  them  by  treaty.  In  1913,  however,  the 


16 


California  Alien  Land  Law  was  passed.  In  this  law  federal 
discrimination  as  to  the  exclusive  eligibility  of  white  and 
African  races  to  naturalization  was  made  the  basis  of  eco¬ 
nomic  discrimination.  Aliens  in  Califoma  were  divided  into 
two  classes  and  given  different  privileges.  Those  eligible  to 
citizenship  were  given  all  the  rights  of  land  ownership  ac¬ 
corded  to  citizens  of  the  United  States.  All  others  were 
given  such  rights  of  land  ownership  as  were  expressly  guar¬ 
anteed  them  by  treaty,  and  in  addition  were  permitted  to 
lease  land  for  agricultural  purposes  for  three  years.  Such 
aliens,  if  owners  of  land,  were  forbidden  to  transfer  it  to  their 
fellow  countrymen  or  to  organize  corporations,  the  majority 
of  the  stockholders  of  which  were  aliens  not  eligible  to  citi¬ 
zenship.  It  was  frankly  stated  that  this  legislation  w^as  in¬ 
tended  to  discriminate  against  the  Japanese.  It  is  this  dis¬ 
crimination  which  is  the  very  heart  of  the  as  yet  open  protest 
made  by  the  Japanese  Government  to  the  United  States. 

It  is  difficult  for  the  American  people  to  appreciate  this 
fact,  because  they  are  likely  to  confuse  the  issue  with  the 
danger  of  unlimited  Asiatic  immigration.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  however,  the  Japanese  Government  has  undertaken  to 
check  all  immigration  of  Japanese  workingmen  and  are  en¬ 
forcing  this  promise  scrupulously.  There  is,  therefore,  no 
question  concerning  Japanese  immigration  to  California,  or 
even  to  Canada  and  Mexico.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  there  are 
probably  10,000  fewer  Japanese  workingmen  in  the  United 
States  to-day  than  there  were  eight  years  ago.  Nor  is  it 
possible  to  justify  this  discrimination  by  reference  to  the 
limits  set  in  Japan  upon  ownership  of  land  by  Americans. 
Whatever  their  limitations  are,  they  are  shared  by  all  aliens, 
and  there  is  no  anti-American  discrimination.  The  real  issue, 
and  the  only  issue  in  the  California  problem,  is  the  affront  to 
the  dignity  of  Japan  by  discriminating  legislation.  The  Fed- 
.eral  Government  attempted  to  prevent  this  affront,  but  the 
State  of  California  refused  to  listen  to  the  request  of  Presi¬ 
dent  Wilson  and  Secretary  Bryan,  and  passed  the  law. 


17 


Wherever  we  discussed  this  matter  in  Japan  we  found 
that  they  insisted  Japan  was  a  friend  of  the  United  States 
and  that  this  friendship  was  of  long  standing.  This  action 
of  the  California  legislature,  however,  was  a  serious  blow  to 
the  friendship,  although  they  believed,  especially  since  the 
Christian  people  of  the  United  States  had  taken  the  matter  up, 
that  justice  would  ultimately  be  done. 

I  cannot  believe  that  any  fair-minded  American  can  hold 
any  different  opinion  regarding  this  situation  than  that  which 
is  held  by  the  Japanese  themselves.  The  difficulty,  of  course, 
is  to  adjust  matters  in  the  interest  of  fair  play.  At  the  ver}' 
outset  we  are  confronted  by  the  gap  between  the  power  of 
the  Federal  Government  to  make  treaties  and  its  inability 
to  control  the  treatment  accorded  the  subjects  of  the  Powers 
with  whom  it  has  treaties  of  friendship.  This  difficulty  the 
Japanese  to  some  extent  understand,  but  it  is,  nevertheless, 
a  serious  flaw  in  our  governmental  procedure.  It  is  highly 
desirable,  in  fact  imperative,  that  some  steps  be  taken  by  Con¬ 
gress  to  remedy  this  defect.  The  issue  raised  at  the  present 
time  by  the  Japanese  Government  has  been  raised  by  other 
nations  and  is  likely  to  be  a  source  of  new  irritation  and  enmity. 
It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  matter  can  be  handled  on  its  merits 
as  a  constitutional  question  rather  than  merely  as  a  phase  of 
the  American-Japanese  issue. 

Our  protracted  discussions  with  the  representative  men 
of  Japan  have  left  no  doubt  in  our  minds  as  to  the  fundamental 
friendship  of  the  Japanese  Empire.  At  the  same  time  it  can¬ 
not  be  denied  that  there  is  an  anti-American  spirit  in  certain 
quarters  throughout  the  Empire.  This  spirit  we  were  assured 
by  competent  observers  is  only  a  reflex  of  anti-Japanese  feel¬ 
ing  in  America,  and  is  less  to-day  than  a  few  months  ago 
when  talk  of  war  with  the  United  States  was  probably  as 
common  among  certain  classes  in  Japan  as  talk  of  war  with 
Japan  is  current  among  corresponding  classes  in  the  United 
States.  I  do  not  believe  that  we  were  misled  by  the  repeated 


18 


statements  that  the  Japanese  did  not  want  war  with  the 
United  States  and  w'ere  ready  to  await  the  proper  action  on 
the  part  of  the  United  States.  Gratifying  as  this  evidence  of 
patient  friendship  on  the  part  of  Japan  is,  it  seems  to  me 
unworthy  of  a  great  nation  like  the  United  States  to  leave 
the  situation  in  its  present  status  in  which  an  unanswered 
protest  is  still  lodged  with  our  State  Department  in  Wash¬ 
ington.  We  ought  not  to  let  the  possibility  of  war  rise  and 
fall  w'ith  the  financial  condition  of  a  friendly  nation  whose 
honor  we  have  permitted  to  be  insulted.  Baron  Kato  frankly 
says  that  the  material  issue  at  stake  in  the  California  legisla¬ 
tion  is  relatively  small,  but  none  the  less  I  cannot  believe  that 
a  nation  with  the  professed  ideals  of  the  United  States  will 
permit  another  nation  to  cherish  a  sense  of  ill  treatment  which 
will  be  a  fertile  ground  on  which  suspicions  and  misunder¬ 
standings  can  bear  bitter  fruit.  We  cannot  afiford  to  have 
the  friendship  of  the  tw’o  nations  degenerate  into  a  mere 
desire  on  the  part  of  each  that  the  other  shall  be  friendly. 

2.  To  my  mind  the  situation  which  is  now  growing  up 
about  China  is  of  greater  importance  for  the  future  than  the 
so-called  California  problem,  serious  as  that  is.  For  in  it  are 
involved  not  only  our  relations  with  Japan  but  the  interests 
and  policies  of  practically  all  the  great  nations  of  the  future. 
I  doubt  if  any  men,  outside  of  the  Governments  concerned, 
know  accurately  the  demands  which  have  been  made  by  Japan 
and  China.  We  have  had  statements  purporting  to  represent 
these  demands,  and  two  sets  of  such  statements  especially 
deserve  attention.  One  of  these  purports  to  be  the  demands 
presented  by  Japan  to  China  and  the  other  is  a  document 
given  by  Japan  to  the  representatives  of  the  Pow'ers.  The 
two  agree  in  general  as  regards  proposals  wnth  reference  to 
Shantung,  Manchuria  and  Eastern  Mongolia,  but  the  Japanese 
note  to  the  Powers  omits  the  demands  contained  in  Group 
Five  of  the  other  statement,  and  it  is  this  group  in  which 
the  world  at  large  has  particular  interest,  for  in  it  are  de¬ 
mands  involving  the  independence  of  Chinese  governmental 
policy,  if  not  powers. 


19 


Much  of  the  news  emanating  from  Peking  is  obviously 
colored  by  anti- Japanese  feeling  and  it  is  very  difficult  to 
accept  any  of  the  reports  on  their  face  value ;  in  fact,  this 
coloring  of  reports  in  the  apparent  interest  of  making  trouble 
between  the  United  States  and  Japan  is  a  menace  in  the 
present  relations  between  the  two  countries.  But  after  due 
allowance  is  made  for  such  coloring,  enough  uncertainty 
remains  to  cause  serious  thought. 

America’s  interest  in  China  is  essentially  two-fold ;  in 
the  first  place,  it  involves  the  maintenance  of  the  so-called 
“open  door  policy.”  To  this  Japan  has  agreed  and  during 
the  past  few  weeks  Count  Okuma  has  repeatedly  stated  in 
his  interviews  to  both  Dr.  Gulick  and  myself,  and  others, 
that  this  policy  is  to  be  maintained.  Personally,  I  take 
these  statements  literally,  neither  reading  into  them  nor 
detracting  from  them.  I  believe  Japan  will  maintain  the 
'^open  door”  in  China,  but  that  in  so  doing  she  will  not  turn 
to  the  left  nor  the  right  from  that  which  is  her  own  interest 
interpreted  in  the  largest  sense. 

Similarly,  as  regards  the  integrity  and  sovereignty  of 
China,  I  take  the  statements  of  Count  Okuma  literally,  neither 
reducing  them  nor  drawing  from  them  implications  which 
American  sympathies  or  fear  might  suggest.  As  Baron  Kato 
stated  in  his  address  at  the  Association  Concordia,  Japan  in¬ 
tends  to  obtain  her  rights  in  China— no  more  and  no  less. 

But  until  Japan  more  clearly  indicates  just  what  she 
believes  these  rights  to  be,  there  is  a  great  area  in  which  the 
relations  of  Japan  and  the  United  States  as  regards  China 
are  subject  to  no  well-defined  limits.  By  the  so-called  Root- 
Takahira  agreement,  either  nation  has  a  right  to  question  the 
other  when  its  interests  seem  to  be  involved  by  the  action  of 
the  other,  and  it  is  on  the  basis  of  this  agreement  that  the 
United  States  has  addressed  friendly  inquiries  to  Japan  as 
to  the  situation  in  China.  Thus  far  neither  Government  has 
made  official  statements  as  to  the  nature  of  these  inquiries  or 
the  answers  given  thereto.  Those  not  in  the  confidence  of 


20 


either  government  consequently  cannot  avoid  some  apprehen¬ 
sion  lest  the  treaties  between  the  United  States  with  China 
are  involved.  At  the  same  time  Japan  may  be  planning 
concessions  and  agreements  which  may  go  far  to  stabilize 
conditions  in  China. 

It  is  desirable,  however,  that  without  being  unduly  swayed 
by  sympathies,  the  American  people  should  understand  Japan^s 
position  relative  to  China. 

Not  only  the  future  prosperity  but  the  actual  national 
existence  of  Japan  is  involved  in  the  maintenance  of  the  sov¬ 
ereignty  and  integrity  of  China.  A  China  divided  by  or  under 
the  control  of  European  nations,  with  unavoidable  concessions 
and  naval  bases,  would  expose  Japan  to  constant  danger  of  war. 
She  has  already  realized  the  cost  of  this  issue  in  the  Russo- 
Japanese  War.  By  virtue  of  that  war  and  later  agreements  she 
has  obtained  possession  of  Korea  and  important  concessions  in¬ 
volving  police  powers  in  Southern  Manchuria,  and  is,  there¬ 
fore,  reasonably  safe  against  an  attack  from  the  North,  pro¬ 
viding  only  she  is  able  to  control  these  two  great  territories. 
By  the  victory  of  Tsingtao  she  now  controls  a  third  harbor 
on  the  coast  of  China  and,  for  the  moment  at  least,  is  free 
from  German  rivalry  and  influence  in  China.  Great  Britain 
and  France,  of  course,  still  control  the  ports  which  mark  the 
progress  of  the  assault  upon  the  integrity  of  China  by  foreign 
nations  in  the  nineties,  but,  if  the  present  status  is  conserved, 
Japan  may  fairly  well  be  said  to  be  safe  from  immediate 
danger  of  attack  through  China.  This  status,  however,  is 
always  liable  to  be  changed  by  the  pressure  brought  to  bear 
upon  China  by  other  powers  because  of  debts  now  amounting 
to  nearly  a  billion  dollars  or  in  order  to  gain  concessions 
of  various  sorts.  In  view  of  this  liability  it  is  not  strange 
that  Japan,  remembering  the  last  twenty  years  of  Euro¬ 
pean  intervention  in  China,  sees  dangers  of  further  political 
control  in  that  republic.  In  the  present  negotiations  she 
apparently  is  endeavoring  to  safeguard  herself  from  such 
liability. 


21 


If  this  is  the  actual  extent  of  the  Japanese  demand,  and 
if  the  only  purpose  Japan  has  is  to  build  up  an  Asiatic  Monroe 
Doctrine,  the  American  people  can  hardly  fail  to  sympathize 
with  her,  particularly  as  we  recall  her  need  for  territory  in 
which  to  expand.  This  principle  of  colonization  in  the  inter¬ 
ests  of  overflowing  population,  it  is  true,  has  never  been  fol¬ 
lowed  by  America ;  but  it  is  probably  too  much  to  expect  that 
Japan,  with  its  territorial  limitations,  would  fail  to  follow 
the  precedent  set  by  all  European  powers.  At  all  events 
Japan  has  confessedly  set  her  hand  at  developing  its  trade 
with  China,  and  regards  someTorm  of  colonization  as  neces¬ 
sary  for  the  success  of  that  policy. 

But  the  analogy  of  the  Monroe  Doctrine  will  not  justify 
the  direct  or  indirect,  whole  or  partial  control  of  China  by 
Japan  in  the  interests  of  Japanese  commercial  or  territorial 
expansion.  The  United  States,  it  may  be  conceded,  adopted 
the  Monroe  Doctrine  as  a  means  of  self-protection,  but  it  has 
never  been  made  an  excuse  for  aggrandizement  or  interference 
in  the  governmental  policy  of  American  Republics.  The 
policy  of  Japan  may  be  likened  to  that  of  the  Monroe  Doc¬ 
trine,  therefore,  only  in  so  far  as  the  nation  seeks  to  protect 
itself  through  checking  European  aggressions  in  China ;  but  it 
will  be  quite  different  in  so  far  as  it  may  involve  the  establish¬ 
ment  of  Japan  as  a  predominant  political  influence  and  check 
in  the  internal  affairs  of  China.  Yet  it  is  precisely  at  this  point 
that  America  is  drawn  into  the  situation.  It  not  only  desires 
the  “open  door”  for  commerce,  but  it  also  does  not  want  to  see 
China  dismembered  or  the  subject  of  Japan.  In  my  opinion,  it  is 
unfair  to  attribute  either  of  these  two  purposes  to  Japan,  but 
I  am  frank  to  say  that  it  seems  also  true  that  Japan  intends 
to  have  a  predominating  influence  in  the  development  of  China. 
If  this  influence  is  to  be  magnanimously  in  the  interests  of 
China  rather  than  in  those  of  Japan,  the  world  will  certainly 
applaud  the  Japanese  policy,  but  it  is  difficult  for  either  Europe 
or  America  to  hold  an  unqualified  conviction  that  this  is 
Japan’s  plan  until  they  are  taken  further  into  Japan’s  con¬ 
fidence. 


22 


In  this  juncture  China  looks  hopefully  to  the  United 
States,  just  as  Japan,  before  that  Empire  became  the  present 
World  Power,  looked  to  the  United  States,  for  Japan  cannot 
fail  to  remember  the  services  of  Townsend  Harris  in  pre¬ 
venting  the  exploitation  of  Japan  by  European  powers. 

Thus  America,  both  because  of  the  “open  door"  treaties 
and  from  the  protecting  of  a  weak  nation,  has  been  drawn 
into  the  Asiatic  maelstrom.  If  I  interpret  the  American 
attitude  correctly,  there  is  a  general  belief  among  the  more 
intelligent  men  that  it  would  be  better  for  China  to  develop 
under  Asiatic  leadership  than  under  European.  But  the  ques¬ 
tion  still  remains — Why  should  China  require  any  leadership 
involving  political  control?  Would  not  the  chivalrous  policy 
on  the  part  of  all  nations  be  to  guarantee  China  free  oppor¬ 
tunity  for  self-development?  If  China  must  at  the  same 
moment  in  which  she  is  passing  through  social  revolution 
incident  to  the  coming  in  of  Western  civilization  be  forced 
also  to  protect  herself  from  the  nations  which  would  exploit 
her  weakness,  the  future  is  certainly  dark — both  for  China 
and  for  the  rest  of  the  world.  It  is  an  opportunity  for  broad 
and  generous  treatment  on  the  part  of  Japan.  I  cannot  refrain 
from  expressing  the  hope  that  a  nation  that  has  accomplished 
so  much  in  the  way  of  material  transformation  may  find  that 
spiritual  forces  already  operating  among  her  leaders  will  be 
sufficient  to  lead  to  a  hearty  co-operation  between  herself  and 
the  United  States,  not  only  in  maintaining  the  technical  sov¬ 
ereignty  and  integrity  of  China,  but  in  watching  over  China's 
interests  until  that  great  land  finds  itself  able  to  erect  itself 
into  political  order  and  economical  efficiency.  Cannot  the 
two  nations  co-operate  for  the  good  of  China  as  well  as  for 
establishing  trade  with  China  ? 

Here  seems  to  me  to  be  a  supreme  opportunity  for  the 
I  ffiited  States  and  Japan  to  show  the  meaning,  not  only  of 
their  friendship  for  each  other,  but  for  China  as  well.  In  a 
moment  when  all  Europe  has  found  the  diplomacy  of  force 
bringing  about  indescribable  misery,  the  United  States  and 


23 


Japan  have  the  opportunity  to  demonstrate  the  power  of  a 
diplomacy  based  upon  the  giving  of  justice. 

I  hesitate  to  give  expression  to  the  profound  feeling 
with  which  I  contemplate  this  possibility  of  the  two  nations 
co-operating  in  generous  brotherliness  toward  Asia.  I  have 
found  Japan  so  full  of  noble  sentiments,  so  eager  for  the  best 
things  in  our  Western  world,  while  yet  so  loyal  to  the  best 
heritage  of  her  past,  that  I  have  not  only  admiration  for  her 
scholars  and  statesmen,  but  the  highest  hopes  for  her  national 
expansion.  I  believe  she  has  in  large  measure  the  future  of 
Asia  in  her  keeping.  No  such  opportunity  has  come  to  any 
Asiatic  nation,  perhaps  to  no  nation  of  the  world,  to  show 
that  a  magnanimous  policy  is  the  wise  policy.  I  feel  it  a  test 
of  Japan’s  true  greatness.  Will  she  only  repeat  the  lessons 
taught  by  European  policies  in  Asia,  insisting  only  upon  her 
rights ;  or  will  she  give  the  world  a  new  and  epoch-making 
lesson  in  sacrificial  internationalism,  in  which,  while  protect¬ 
ing  her  own  future,  she  shall,  with  the  hearty  co-operation  of 
America,  also  safeguard  the  rights  of  a  huge,  unshaped  people 
bravely  tiffing  to  tread  the  same  path  she  herself  has  trod? 

If  she  chooses  the  latter  task  with  its  sacrificial  giving  of 
justice,  she  will  capture  the  love  and  admiration  of  every  true 
patriot  the  world  over,  and  she  will  open  in  world  history 
an  epoch  that  shall  indeed  be  not  only  Meiji — the  Enlightened 
— ^but  Taisho — that  of  Great  Righteousness. 

Thus  we  reach  the  conclusion  of  the  matter:  The  United 
States  and  Japan  are  rapidly  acquiring  the  same  civilization, 
the  same  ethical  point  of  view  toward  life,  and  are  together 
facing  the  problem  of  a  new  Asia.  It  should  be  the  duty  of 
every  thoughtful  person  within  these  two  great  nations  so  to 
understand  each  other  that  this  fellowship  may  not  be  dis¬ 
turbed  by  injustice  and  suspicion.  The  United  States  should 
do  justice  to  Japanese  in  America.  It  should  co-operate  with 
Japan  as  the  leader  and  teacher  of  the  new  China  through  its 
period  of  development.  The  world  is  already  confronting  along 
the  Pacific  the  same  issues  which  have  broken  down  the  peace 


24 


of  Europe.  Is  it  too  much  to  hope  that  the  representatives 
of  noble  ideals  in  America  and  in  Japan  shall  be  wise  enough 
and  influential  enough  to  create  a  public  opinion  strong  enough 
to  make  reliance  upon  force  give  way  to  reliance  upon  friend¬ 
ship  and  justice?  If  such  is  to  be  the  basis  of  the  inter¬ 
nationalism  of  the  Pacific,  the  meeting  of  the  two  civilizations 
in  Asia  under  the  fraternal  guidance  of  Japan  and  the  United 
States  will  be  no  threat  of  international  dispute  but  a  guarantee 
of  world  peace. 


25 


y 


C  '  • 

;  '  ( 

'j 

■i 


*?.  1  I  Hi  ’.'•'T  ,-T  :■  I'l 


The  Church  Peace  Union 

{Founded  by  Andrew  Carnegie) 

TRUSTEES 

Rev.  Peter  Ainslie,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Baltimore,  Md. 

Rev.  Arthur  Judson  Brown,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  New  York. 

Rev.  Francis  E.  Clark,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Boston,  Mass. 
President  W.  H.  P.  Faunce,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Providence,  R.  I. 
His  Eminence,  James  Cardinal  Gibbons,  Baltimore,  Md. 
Rt.  Rev.  David  H.  Greer,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  New  York 
Rev.  Frank  O.  Hall,  D.D.,  New  York. 

Bishop  E.  R.  Hendrix,  D.D.,  Kansas  City,  Mo. 

Rabbi  Emil  G.  Hirsch,  LL.D.,  Chicago,  Ill. 

Hamilton  Holt,  LL.D.,  New  York 

Professor  William  I.  Hull,  Ph.D.,  Swarthmore,  Pa. 

Rev.  Charles  E.  Jefferson,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  New  York. 

Rev.  Jenkin  Lloyd  Jones,  LL.D.,  Chicago,  Ill. 

Rt.  Rev.  William  Lawrence,  D.D.,  Boston,  Mass. 

Rev.  Frederick  Lynch,  D.D.,  New  York. 

Rev.  Charles  S.  Macfarland,  Ph.D.,  New  York. 

Marcus  M.  Marks,  New  York 

Dean  Shailer  Mathews,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Chicago,  Ill. 

Edwin  D.  Mead,  M.A.,  Boston,  Mass. 

Rev.  William  Pierson  Merrill,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  New  York. 
John  R.  Mott,  LL.D.,  New  York 
George  A.  Plimpton,  LL.D.,  New  York. 

Rev.  Julius  B.  Remensnyder,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  New  York, 
Judge  Henry  Wade  Rogers,  LL.D.,  New  York. 

Robert  E.  Speer,  D.D.,  New  York. 

Francis  Lynde  Stetson,  New  York. 

James  J.  Walsh,  M.D.,  New  York. 

Bishop  Luther  B.  Wilson,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  New  York. 


